If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Welcome to CycloneFanatic.com. I notice you haven't taken the time to register yet, now is as good of time as any:)

Re: Pakistan

Al Qaeda has not "shifted their focus to Afganistan and Pakistan." Pakistan has been ground zero for al Qaeda all along. If the U.S. was serious about fighting terrorism this is where the emphasis should have been placed instead of invading Iraq.

Re: Pakistan

Originally Posted by Kyle

The enemy of our enemy is our friend. It worked with Saddam...

Mussarref is a reluctant supporter of U.S. goals at best. He saw the writing on the wall when the U.S. invaded Afghanistan and switched alliances. Nevertheless, that didn't change the fact that Mussarref is a thug.

Re: Pakistan

I just don't understand why Musharraf is our best option. Is it because Pakistan is one of the largest purchasers of U.S. arms?

Pakistan is the breeding ground for the terrorist groups that we are supposed to be fighting. In addition, Pakistan has become the rest and recreation center where terrorists recuperate between their attacks on the iinfidels. Bin Laden has been holed up in Pakistan for how long now? And how is the Pakistani army going to rain all those bombs and missiles they are purchasing from the U.S. on the enemy they cannot even locate?

The argument that Musharref is our best option does not hold up against mounting evidence that, as an ally, Musharraf has been an opportunist from the start who has continued to help the Taliban (just as he had done before 9/11 ) and who has gone after Al Qaeda cells in Pakistan only to the extent necessary to fend off U.S. pressure.

The Los Angeles Times published an editorial September 5, 2006 titled, "Pakistan: Friend or Foe? The U.S. Shouldn't prop up President Musharraf's military regime."

The theme of the article is that the current support of Musharraf is misguided.

I have provided some excerpts and the link:

The Islamic parties are flourishing under the protective umbrella of the Pakistani armed forces. Their growth would be slowed if secular political forces had a chance to assert themselves through free elections and a parliamentary system liberated from army manipulation. Under Musharraf, the army has seized much more power than past military regimes, installing military officers in hundreds of government posts previously held by civil servants. Army-sponsored conglomerates control multibillion-dollar enterprises and will not be easily dislodged. As a Pakistani editor commented, "Most countries have an army, but in Pakistan, the army has a country."

The U.S. should use its aid leverage to promote three goals: Bhutto and Sharif should be permitted to return and organize freely. If Musharraf wants to run for president again, he should step down as army chief of staff and run as a civilian. Finally, he should turn over power to a neutral caretaker government that would conduct the elections. This would be welcomed in Pakistan even by elements within the armed forces. An open letter in July from a group of retired generals called for "the disengagement of the military from political power." As one of its signatories, Lt. Gen. Talat Masood, observed, "There is a genuine urge and demand in the country to revert to democracy and give a fair deal to all the parties."

Re: Pakistan

Musharraf is the best option because he is in charge. We can't exactly topple him and set up someone in his place without a huge mess. At best we can pressure him to do what is in our interests, and so far he has been doing that to an extent.

Re: Pakistan

I'm not advocating that we topple Musharraf. However, we need to realize that he is an unreliable client. We seem to be coddling up to Musharraf much like we did with Sadaam Hussein in the 1980s. Having Sadaam Hussein as a strategic ally didn't work out for the best, and potentially we could be going down the same road with Musharraf.

All content owned by CycloneFanatic.com - All rights reserved 2005-09. By viewing this website you agree to the Terms of Service, Site Rules and Legal Disclaimer. The words, views, images and opinions expressed or provided by users do not reflect the opinions or views of CycloneFanatic.com or Iowa State University. The names, words, symbols, and graphics representing Iowa State University are trademarks and copyrights of the University protected by the trademark and copyright laws of the United States of America and other countries and are used on this web site under license from the University. Original site design, premise & construction by Jeremy Lind.